|
In response to
"Would you care to share the empirical data, out of curiosity? "
by
JackDawson
|
The second map on this article has got a great hover feature that lists the individual plant and number of reported cases.
|
The biggie of course is Smithfield in Sioux Falls, 783 cases out of a work force of 3700 before they shut down (and thus quit reporting cases). To the absolute best of my knowledge no grocery store has reported a 20% infection rate amongst its workers, or even significant numbers approaching the lower rate of some of these other plants.
To go back to the disagreement, the original question posed by you as I understand it was what about Trump's decision bothered people. I said there were pros and cons, and one of the biggest cons being the nature of the work of food processing.
Nothing has a risk factor of zero, but I was stating that grocery workers had a much lower risk than processors.
The risk levels amongst essential workers varies greatly. One hears a lot about health care workers obviously, and then fire and police, and then to a lesser degree transit workers. But others don't get mentioned because they are at a far lower risk.
One group of essential workers that are out there every day and no one mentions is sanitation workers. The toilets still flush and the garbage still gets picked up, so you know they are there. But they aren't talked about because their risk level, while not zero, is tolerable.
That is all I was saying. Grocery workers face a far lower risk level than processors. Of course its not zero, but nothing really is.
|
Responses:
|